Court of Appeal finds in favour of council in dispute over findings of suitability of offered accommodation in absence of lawful housing needs assessment

Lord Justice Lewison said section 189A provided that a local authority must make an assessment of the applicant's case if it is satisfied they are homeless or threatened with homelessness and eligible for assistance.

Applicant Thomas Norton complained the accommodation he was offered was unsuitable and asked for a review of Haringey's decision.

The reviewing officer rejected his complaints and Mr Norton's solicitors said no lawful decision on the suitability of the accommodation could be made in the absence of a lawful housing needs section 189A assessment.

Mr Norton then appealed to the county court, but HHJ Saggerson dismissed his argument that a lawful assessment under section 189A and a lawful personal housing plan were pre-conditions of a valid suitability decision.

HHJ Saggerson said section 189A did not impose any obligations on a reviewing officer - although it could have done - and did not provide that an assessment of suitability is unlawful in the absence of a section 189A assessment.

He said the acid test was whether the reviewing officer had sufficient comprehensive information on which to make a determination.

Mr Norton then appealed, but justices upheld HHJ Saggerson’s decision.

Explaining his judgment, Lewison LJ said: “Parliament has, as it so often does, laid down an imperative requirement without specifying what the consequences are of a failure to comply.”

He said Mr Norton “has lost nothing of value” having received the decision on suitability to which he was entitled and which contained no legal flaw.

“In my judgment the consequences of holding that compliance with the duty under section 189A is a condition precedent are stark; and unlikely to reflect Parliament's intention,” Lewison LJ said.

If Mr Norton was right, the lack of a section 189 assessment would render an authority unable to take any steps under section 189B to help an applicant to secure accommodation, and if “a local housing authority, in the absence of a section 189A assessment, made an impeccable assessment of suitability, and then offered that accommodation to the applicant the offer would be unlawful,” Lewison LJ said.

“I find it impossible to conclude that Parliament can have intended that an otherwise lawful offer, which would have the direct effect of immediate relief of homelessness, would be invalid and unlawful for lack of a section 189A assessment.”

Lewison LJ concluded: “In short, an authority would be partially paralysed; and prevented from carrying out what would otherwise be some of its duties to help the homeless or those threatened with homelessness. Parliament is unlikely to have contemplated such paralysis as being acceptable.”

Lord Justice Warby and Lord Justice Jeremy Baker both agreed.

Commenting on the case, Stephen Evans, of the Five Paper Chambers, who appeared for Haringey, said: “The Court of Appeal agreed with the council’s case, that a housing needs assessment and personal housing plan is not a condition precedent to a finding of suitability.”

Mr Evans noted Lewison LJ had found Mr Norton was raising a purely technical and procedural argument and the county court had been right to reject this.

Mark Smulian